Patrick Radden Keefe originally wanted to call his examination of Sen. Arlen Specter’s so-called “compromise” bill on NSA spying, “Don’t Shit in my Hand and Call it a Sundae.” His editors at Slate declined, alas. Luckily, they seem to have left Patrick alone for the rest of his analysis of Specter’s 18-page legal ejecta. Here’s a chunk:
Review by the FISA court is optional. Whereas under the 1978 law, the president could authorize surveillance without seeking a warrant for up to 15 days after a declaration of war, Specter’s bill eliminates the declaration-of-war provision and expands that 15-day grace period to a year.
And Specter is just getting warmed up. Toward the end of the bill, a few sly additions demonstrate that everything else, accommodating though it seemed, was mere preamble. Section 801 proposes to amend FISA by inserting the phrase, “Nothing in this Act shall be construed to limit the constitutional authority of the President to collect intelligence with respect to foreign powers and agents of foreign powers.” In other words, none of the constraints just outlined should be interpreted as absolute, because nothing in the preceding pages counts!
This provision, along with the accompanying suggestion that the president can find authorization to wiretap either through FISA or “under the Constitution,” effectively codify the Bush administration’s controversial argument that the president’s authority as commander in chief under Article II of the Constitution gives him virtually unconstrained license to do whatever he sees fit, national-security-wise. According to this view, it’s not the NSA surveillance program that’s unconstitutional, but FISA itself. Critics have dubbed this the Article II on Steroids theory; and however much he puffs out his chest at the administration, it appears that Arlen Specter has become a subscriber. (emphasis mine)
Check out Ryan Singel’s analysis, too.
Yeah, that picture is possibly the worlds worst looking human being…photographed…no offense to the man…heh
Kaltes,
My sentiments exactly. I have been following defensetech.org for about 2 years now…the leftward tilt is becomnig more and more extreme. Who is the real threat? Bush?
Meanwhile back in realit.…Iran and NK are building nukes and delivery platforms while collaborating with fascists Islamists in Iran and Hezbollah whom wish to hasten the arrival of the 12th Imam and Armageddon. Yeah we should be worried about Bush and the evil NSA trying their best to catch these psychopathic killers.
Wait… are some of you actually supporting Specter’s Bill? Say what you will about the (amusing) picture, but this is some sriously scary legislation. And why must everyone run around calling each other “Liberals” or “Conservatives” in a condescending manner? We are Americans, not Democrats or Republicans. It’s fine to have an opinion one way or other on an issue, but it’s another thing to take that view just because that’s what your party tells you. It’s also equally stupid to take a side just because your “political enemy” holds an opposing view. Use common sense and take the position that is good for the country.
I fail to see what is scary about the legislation given the information in the underlying DT post.
The NSA program has the overwhelming support of the American people. The only people I see opposing it are hard core privacy absolutists and their allies on the left who jumped this bandwagon as a way to take shots at Bush and his supposedly out-of-control imperial Presidency.
I don’t think the executive has ever been weaker than it is now, with the whole mainstream media establishment actively undermining it coupled with their criminal leaker insider allies.
I wish I didn’t have to draw that line with “liberals” but unfortunately the stark contrast is there. The US has enough enemies abroad to worry about without having liberals undermining our efforts to keep the country safe because they want to make the republicans/bush look bad.
I don’t think it’s fair to call the support of about 50% of the population (according to most polls) “overwhelming support”.…
That’s like the old Bolshevik-Menshevik trick: the party whose platform lost by one vote at the convention got slapped with the label Mensheviks (minoritarians) and made to look like the out-of-touch reactionaries, while the more extreme party labeled themselves the Bolsheviks (majoritarians).
By which I don’t mean to go around calling anyone a communist, just to point out that turning 50% into “overwhelming support” is a nasty rhetorical trick.
this is total bull crap he dosent deserve to be put away for what he did
Ye Gods, did somebody open the Ark of the covenant or something? Nasty.